Atheist nation?

[AlP]

and where proselytizing (even to one's children) was banned, the country would become atheist in a hurry

George Orwell's novel 1984 sprang to mind. Doublethink:

The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies â€" all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

I like the freedom of speech idea, even when some people freely state things I disagree with.

=)

[Ninteen45]

I would be curious as to how an atheist nation was defined. Would the state endorse atheism? Would theists be expelled?

I think a country where they did not give any state money to religious based organisations or programs, and where proselytizing (even to one's children) was banned, the country would become atheist in a hurry, and theism would be maintained at exceptionally low levels.

Everytime you read this post, a FOX news reporter commits suicide.

[SSY]

=)

I don't like freedom of speech if it means the young and vulnerable have their minds corrupted by those who are meant to be ensuring their safe and healthy development.

[Ultima22689]

=)

I don't like freedom of speech if it means the young and vulnerable have their minds corrupted by those who are meant to be ensuring their safe and healthy development.

Indeed, making sure our kids don't suffer from brainwashing that invokes racism and plenty of other negative things is hardly taking away free speech, they can still found a church, take their kids there, they just won't get any support and if anyone does preach in public or anything of the sort then they can just be heavily fined. Double it every time. There will be a very minor religious population, sure however I would imagine churches wouldn't last long. They make money by indoctrinating more people, if that's illegal they can't make much money or something like that.

[AlP]

=)

I don't like freedom of speech if it means the young and vulnerable have their minds corrupted by those who are meant to be ensuring their safe and healthy development.

Yes freedom of speech does have its issues.

[sarcasm]Here's another idea for an atheist nation that I think is actually more humane than preventing religious parents from sharing there beliefs with their children. Don't let them have children. It could work like the People's Republic of China's family planning policy of aborting if parents go beyond their 1 child quota. Except religious people would have a 0 child quota. Get it? Besides, would you really trust a religious parent not to tell their child about religion in secret? Utopia here we come![/sarcasm]

Anyway seriously... How do you enforce an atheist nation without resorting to persecution? It seems the only humane way for an atheist nation to come about is if people individually choose atheist belief themselves. We already have a name for that: secular nation. The moment you start enforcing a particular belief or non-belief, even if yours is right, the enforcement itself becomes far worse than the thing it is trying to prevent. I would resist an atheist nation.

[SSY]

You fail to notice the distinction, people would be free to believe what they want, but they would not be allowed to push their views on others, simple. I would much prefer if everyone would suddenly see the light of reason and throw off the shackles of their faith, but unfortunately, the church is tenacious and people can be gullible when they want to be deceived.

[Heretical Rants]

Bah.

At what point would it be considered proselytizing and not just talking?

[andrewclunn]

The benefits of Atheism only occur when that Atheism is a choice (known as"organic atheism") and not from government coercion Source

Now if only Socialists would realize that the same applies to cooperation...

[venomfangx]

Where are you in this nation?

 

[SSY]

Bah.

At what point would it be considered proselytizing and not just talking?

Basic sketchy outlines would include

Not preaching about your god unless asked specifically to do so.
No threats, direct or indirect about hell, or worldly malaise.
Children below 16 would be unable to consent to religious indoctrination ( ie, no bringing kids to church )

Though obviously this is a nebulous area, just as the laws regarding "inciting racial hatred" are also open to interpretation by the judge, there are always going to be people pushing the boundary, the law is meant to get rid of the worst offenses, the prevailing climate I imagine should take care of the rest.

[Heretical Rants]

I should be allowed to threaten people with Hell if I want to do so.

[Ultima22689]

I should be allowed to threaten people with Hell if I want to do so.

Only in a crippled giant that is choking itself to death with it's own ignorance, self righteousness, selfishness and insistence to be backwards and anti-intellectual.

[Ultima22689]

Where are you in this nation?

 :brick:

[Loffler]

This thread needs a history lesson. The Communist bloc was completely atheist, to the point some countries even had a policy of shutting down churches.

[templeboy]

yeah, but their problem wasn't the atheism, it was the lack of freedom...